"I have a coat on."
Translation:Tá cóta orm.
There are many ways in which different sentences can convey roughly identical meanings.
Also: Roughly identical meanings can be conveyed with the use of different sentences in many ways.
Also: Roughly identical meanings can be conveyed with the use of different sentences, which can be done in a multitude of ways.
Apologies for cheek.
To be clear, I believe the "un-contracted" form (or however one would phrase this - I'm not equipped with the linguistic jargon) would be "ar mé", not "agam" (translating roughly to "at me", used to indicate possession). I don't think "ta ar cota agam" makes any sense grammatically.
Yes, apologies. I realised as I writing this that was not the correct way of phrasing it. I was attempting to allude to what I understand is the etymology of "orm" (~ "on me") in contrast to "agam" (~ "at me") — correct me if I am wrong in this notion, and thanks for clarifying.
Prepositional pronouns are formed from a preposition and a pronoun, but it is important that you don't give the impression that this is optional - ag mé or ar mé isn't an option.
The real point of confusion here is that "have" in this sentence isn't a statement of possession, it's a statement of state, and the governing preposition is really "on" ("there is a coat on me"), and the 1st person singular prepositional pronoun for ar is orm.
Note: "agam" (using the preposition "ag") doesn't figure in this sentence.
Although the English has "have", it's not the same usage as in "I have a coat" (possession) which, in Irish, does use "tá...
ag" ("tá cóta agam").
Here it's the combination "
have on" (a phrasal or prepositional verb construction) conveying the idea of "wearing". In this case, Irish uses "tá...
Note also that the "ar" does not belong with the garment (ie not "ar cota", as in
ConnieKetchum's question ) but with the wearer.